I know the answer, but I am not going to give it to you, figure it out for yourself, that is part of the problem, you are not willing to put in your own work and even read the thread I have posted with the answers.

Sovereign means "self-ruling" asking someone else for answers you can find yourself (I have shown you where to look) is the mindset and heart of one who needs to be governed, not a self ruling man or woman.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

I wasn't asking you specifically.

As a matter of fact, I was hoping that this issue would help lead to clarification for others.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33610307

The thread I linked with lead to clarification, why are you still asking when you have not read that thread?

I will put it simply for you, if you are NOT demanding lawful money as provided for in law (yes, even in Canada) you ARE subject to the commercial US or Canadian bankruptcy and all of its entrapment's of "commerce".

That is why ALL the Sovereign Citizen (including teamlaw) falls flat on its face in a commercial court, their money, their commercial courts.

There is your answer, if you do not want to know more, do not read this thread:

I did a google search of the thread for answers about passports. Apparently it's possible to get a US passport as a Sovereign but I couldn't find the answer to how you pay for it if you can't use US dollars?

I know the answer, but I am not going to give it to you, figure it out for yourself, that is part of the problem, you are not willing to put in your own work and even read the thread I have posted with the answers.

Sovereign means "self-ruling" asking someone else for answers you can find yourself (I have shown you where to look) is the mindset and heart of one who needs to be governed, not a self ruling man or woman.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

I wasn't asking you specifically.

As a matter of fact, I was hoping that this issue would help lead to clarification for others.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33610307

The thread I linked with lead to clarification, why are you still asking when you have not read that thread?

I will put it simply for you, if you are NOT demanding lawful money as provided for in law (yes, even in Canada) you ARE subject to the commercial US or Canadian bankruptcy and all of its entrapment's of "commerce".

That is why ALL the Sovereign Citizen (including teamlaw) falls flat on its face in a commercial court, their money, their commercial courts.

There is your answer, if you do not want to know more, do not read this thread:

I did a google search of the thread for answers about passports. Apparently it's possible to get a US passport as a Sovereign but I couldn't find the answer to how you pay for it if you can't use US dollars?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33610307

READ THE DAMN THREAD I LINKED! I have done it and it is explained exactly how in that thread!

You want something for nothing and that is not how knowledge and freedom are gained!

Or, send me 150 dollars and I will walk you through it (in redeemed lawful money of course, a postal money order will do just fine).

I will walk you through it step by step, including how to get the US postal money order and pay for it with redeemed US treasury notes so you will actually know the process.

Do we have an agreement so I can send you info on where to send the redeemed money?

The Constitution is a contract with the people and the federal government. If the federal government breaks the contract, then the contract is void. It is as simple as that.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24760791

Since none of u seem to know what the h-ll u are talking about ill chime in.First the Constitution is not a contract it is a trust arrangement written by “We the People” making the government trustees. (Read the Preamble)

“As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1] Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts. [2] That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves. [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public. [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.[6]”63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247

Second most do not realize that is basic understanding in law that the people are self governing just like the US GOV. ( a federal corporation) is self governing28 USC § 3002 - DEFINITIONS(15)“United States” means—(A)a Federal corporation; [link to www.law.cornell.edu]

The people are self governing by the common law, grand juries, indictments, jury trials.

The gov. is self governed by rules, regulation, codes, statutes, and administrative courts (this is what most are referring to when they talk about maritime law.)

Statutes only apply to government

There are two worlds going on at the same time. The question then is what world were u in at the time of any compliant.

“The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.” DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)

If the constitution is the supreme law of the land and only applies to government, what makes u think that anything below that applies to anything but the government? There are no such things as constitutional rights, ur rights come from god so read your bible, the constitution merely recognizes what is already known to be true.

“The restrictions that the Constitution places upon the government in its capacity as lawmaker, i.e., as the regulator of private conduct, are not the same as the restrictions that it places upon the government in its capacity as employer. We have recognized this in many contexts, with respect to many different constitutional guarantees. Private citizens perhaps cannot be prevented from wearing long hair, but policemen can. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 247 (1976). Private citizens cannot have their property searched without probable cause, but in many circumstances government employees can. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 723 (1987) (plurality opinion); id., at 732 (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment). Private citizens cannot be punished for refusing to provide the government information that may incriminate them, but government employees can be dismissed when the incriminating information that they refuse to provide relates to the performance of their job. Gardner v. Broderick, [497 U.S. 62, 95] 392 U.S. 273, 277 -278 (1968). With regard to freedom of speech in particular: Private citizens cannot be punished for speech of merely private concern, but government employees can be fired for that reason. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). Private citizens cannot be punished for partisan political activity, but federal and state employees can be dismissed and otherwise punished for that reason. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101 (1947); Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 556 (1973); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 616 -617 (1973).”RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS, 497 U.S. 62 (1990)

Public trustees (government employees) are not protected by the constitution which is why constitution arguments cannot be made in administrative courts.

The TPTB learned a long time ago that forcing people into slavery didn’t work well, so they made the people free(sovereign) and used the masses stupidly against them to get them to contract themselves back into slavery.

I’ll finish with what sovereign actually means.-Blacks Law 2nd EditionSovereign- a chief ruler with supreme power, a king or other ruler with limited power

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts”YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)

"at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called), and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty."Chisholm v. Georgia - 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

Resources for further study:-sedm.org-1215.org-teamlaw.org-Rob Menard-Dean Clifford (who is currently being held in jail as a political prisoner)

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

Nobody knows what they are talking about on this thread? Speak for yourself.

Dean Clifford is in jail and has been numerous times because he is still endorsing the private credit of international bankers. Same with Rob, teamlaw and 1215.

You endorse their debt system and do not play by their rules, you are sunk.

ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) the suitors who are redeeming lawful money are consistently winning against the IRS, local courts and more importantly, avoiding them all together.

If you are not demanding your redemption as spelled out in 12 USC 411 and try what others are doing, you will be in the same place as Dean Clifford, Ted Turner and all the rest of the "trust" "sovereign" gurus.

Your either a complete morAn or a government troll. My post here is the only one worth reading. The lawfull money arguement has been destroyed in court many times. Federal Reserve Notes are 100% lawfull and legal. U keep on going about the public debt. ALL DEBTS ARE OWED TO THE CREDITORS. WHO THEN IS THE CREDITOR? I'LL GIVE U A HINT IT'S THE PEOPLE

The Constitution is a contract with the people and the federal government. If the federal government breaks the contract, then the contract is void. It is as simple as that.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24760791

Since none of u seem to know what the h-ll u are talking about ill chime in.First the Constitution is not a contract it is a trust arrangement written by “We the People” making the government trustees. (Read the Preamble)

“As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1] Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts. [2] That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves. [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public. [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.[6]”63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247

Second most do not realize that is basic understanding in law that the people are self governing just like the US GOV. ( a federal corporation) is self governing28 USC § 3002 - DEFINITIONS(15)“United States” means—(A)a Federal corporation; [link to www.law.cornell.edu]

The people are self governing by the common law, grand juries, indictments, jury trials.

The gov. is self governed by rules, regulation, codes, statutes, and administrative courts (this is what most are referring to when they talk about maritime law.)

Statutes only apply to government

There are two worlds going on at the same time. The question then is what world were u in at the time of any compliant.

“The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.” DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)

If the constitution is the supreme law of the land and only applies to government, what makes u think that anything below that applies to anything but the government? There are no such things as constitutional rights, ur rights come from god so read your bible, the constitution merely recognizes what is already known to be true.

“The restrictions that the Constitution places upon the government in its capacity as lawmaker, i.e., as the regulator of private conduct, are not the same as the restrictions that it places upon the government in its capacity as employer. We have recognized this in many contexts, with respect to many different constitutional guarantees. Private citizens perhaps cannot be prevented from wearing long hair, but policemen can. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 247 (1976). Private citizens cannot have their property searched without probable cause, but in many circumstances government employees can. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 723 (1987) (plurality opinion); id., at 732 (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment). Private citizens cannot be punished for refusing to provide the government information that may incriminate them, but government employees can be dismissed when the incriminating information that they refuse to provide relates to the performance of their job. Gardner v. Broderick, [497 U.S. 62, 95] 392 U.S. 273, 277 -278 (1968). With regard to freedom of speech in particular: Private citizens cannot be punished for speech of merely private concern, but government employees can be fired for that reason. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). Private citizens cannot be punished for partisan political activity, but federal and state employees can be dismissed and otherwise punished for that reason. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101 (1947); Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 556 (1973); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 616 -617 (1973).”RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS, 497 U.S. 62 (1990)

Public trustees (government employees) are not protected by the constitution which is why constitution arguments cannot be made in administrative courts.

The TPTB learned a long time ago that forcing people into slavery didn’t work well, so they made the people free(sovereign) and used the masses stupidly against them to get them to contract themselves back into slavery.

I’ll finish with what sovereign actually means.-Blacks Law 2nd EditionSovereign- a chief ruler with supreme power, a king or other ruler with limited power

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts”YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)

"at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called), and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty."Chisholm v. Georgia - 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

Resources for further study:-sedm.org-1215.org-teamlaw.org-Rob Menard-Dean Clifford (who is currently being held in jail as a political prisoner)

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

Nobody knows what they are talking about on this thread? Speak for yourself.

Dean Clifford is in jail and has been numerous times because he is still endorsing the private credit of international bankers. Same with Rob, teamlaw and 1215.

You endorse their debt system and do not play by their rules, you are sunk.

ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) the suitors who are redeeming lawful money are consistently winning against the IRS, local courts and more importantly, avoiding them all together.

If you are not demanding your redemption as spelled out in 12 USC 411 and try what others are doing, you will be in the same place as Dean Clifford, Ted Turner and all the rest of the "trust" "sovereign" gurus.

Your either a complete morAn or a government troll. My post here is the only one worth reading. The lawfull money arguement has been destroyed in court many times. Federal Reserve Notes are 100% lawfull and legal. U keep on going about the public debt. ALL DEBTS ARE OWED TO THE CREDITORS. WHO THEN IS THE CREDITOR? I'LL GIVE U A HINT IT'S THE PEOPLE

The Constitution is a contract with the people and the federal government. If the federal government breaks the contract, then the contract is void. It is as simple as that.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 24760791

Since none of u seem to know what the h-ll u are talking about ill chime in.First the Constitution is not a contract it is a trust arrangement written by “We the People” making the government trustees. (Read the Preamble)

“As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1] Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts. [2] That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves. [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public. [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.[6]”63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247

Second most do not realize that is basic understanding in law that the people are self governing just like the US GOV. ( a federal corporation) is self governing28 USC § 3002 - DEFINITIONS(15)“United States” means—(A)a Federal corporation; [link to www.law.cornell.edu]

The people are self governing by the common law, grand juries, indictments, jury trials.

The gov. is self governed by rules, regulation, codes, statutes, and administrative courts (this is what most are referring to when they talk about maritime law.)

Statutes only apply to government

There are two worlds going on at the same time. The question then is what world were u in at the time of any compliant.

“The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.” DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)

If the constitution is the supreme law of the land and only applies to government, what makes u think that anything below that applies to anything but the government? There are no such things as constitutional rights, ur rights come from god so read your bible, the constitution merely recognizes what is already known to be true.

“The restrictions that the Constitution places upon the government in its capacity as lawmaker, i.e., as the regulator of private conduct, are not the same as the restrictions that it places upon the government in its capacity as employer. We have recognized this in many contexts, with respect to many different constitutional guarantees. Private citizens perhaps cannot be prevented from wearing long hair, but policemen can. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 247 (1976). Private citizens cannot have their property searched without probable cause, but in many circumstances government employees can. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 723 (1987) (plurality opinion); id., at 732 (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment). Private citizens cannot be punished for refusing to provide the government information that may incriminate them, but government employees can be dismissed when the incriminating information that they refuse to provide relates to the performance of their job. Gardner v. Broderick, [497 U.S. 62, 95] 392 U.S. 273, 277 -278 (1968). With regard to freedom of speech in particular: Private citizens cannot be punished for speech of merely private concern, but government employees can be fired for that reason. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). Private citizens cannot be punished for partisan political activity, but federal and state employees can be dismissed and otherwise punished for that reason. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101 (1947); Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 556 (1973); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 616 -617 (1973).”RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS, 497 U.S. 62 (1990)

Public trustees (government employees) are not protected by the constitution which is why constitution arguments cannot be made in administrative courts.

The TPTB learned a long time ago that forcing people into slavery didn’t work well, so they made the people free(sovereign) and used the masses stupidly against them to get them to contract themselves back into slavery.

I’ll finish with what sovereign actually means.-Blacks Law 2nd EditionSovereign- a chief ruler with supreme power, a king or other ruler with limited power

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts”YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)

"at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called), and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty."Chisholm v. Georgia - 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

Resources for further study:-sedm.org-1215.org-teamlaw.org-Rob Menard-Dean Clifford (who is currently being held in jail as a political prisoner)

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

Nobody knows what they are talking about on this thread? Speak for yourself.

Dean Clifford is in jail and has been numerous times because he is still endorsing the private credit of international bankers. Same with Rob, teamlaw and 1215.

You endorse their debt system and do not play by their rules, you are sunk.

ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) the suitors who are redeeming lawful money are consistently winning against the IRS, local courts and more importantly, avoiding them all together.

If you are not demanding your redemption as spelled out in 12 USC 411 and try what others are doing, you will be in the same place as Dean Clifford, Ted Turner and all the rest of the "trust" "sovereign" gurus.

Your either a complete morAn or a government troll. My post here is the only one worth reading. The lawfull money arguement has been destroyed in court many times. Federal Reserve Notes are 100% lawfull and legal. U keep on going about the public debt. ALL DEBTS ARE OWED TO THE CREDITORS. WHO THEN IS THE CREDITOR? I'LL GIVE U A HINT IT'S THE PEOPLE

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

You are not "the people" if you endorse Federal Reserve Credit. I am not the one sitting in jail, Dean Clifford is, AGAIN.

And Federal Reserve notes are 100% legal and lawful IF and ONLY IF they are endorsed as such by one of the people.

The sad fact is, once you endorse them, you are not acting as one of the people any more.

Your guru is in jail, I am not and have not been for many years, I am sorry if you do not like those facts, but they are the facts.

Also, there are no cases against anyone who is demanding lawful money per 12 USC 411, so you are talking shit about it being destroyed in court cases.

Provide the case you want (Rickman vs Ware maybe?) (US vs THOMAS?) and I will show you how you are dead wrong.

That is an outright lie, I specifically asked for redeemed US Treasury notes, you are feeble minded and cannot read.

I also told him exactly where to find the info for free. So fuck off, liar. Postal money orders are lawful money of the United States, look it up, fool.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

That bolded part isn't true imho, you posted:

"send me 150 dollars"

You have to admit that calls your credibility into question here.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 33610307

He is an idiot, don't listen to him. sedm.org - a website that documents everything it says and has been unrebutted by the gov.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

Or, send me 150 dollars and I will walk you through it (in redeemed lawful money of course, a postal money order will do just fine).

That is what I posted, you dimwit, you took it out of context and you know it, so much for your credibility and you reading skills.

Now shove off, please and thank you.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

How could "redeemed lawful money" be part of the context, you didn't even insinuate that? I realize that hypothetically that's all you can use according to your claim but there wasn't even a hint that you were asking for that:

Quoting:

"Or, send me 150 dollars and I will walk you through it (in redeemed lawful money of course, a postal money order will do just fine).

I will walk you through it step by step, including how to get the US postal money order and pay for it with redeemed US treasury notes so you will actually know the process."

and my understanding is the few that have tried the sovreign citizen stance in court do not understand the law or correct syntax and usually purger themselves.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 34281023

right here's my take on that. Know your rights, not some of them, all of them, as far as the 'law' is concerned 'He who knows no rights, has none'. Most law in ex british colonies, sorry guys, is based on Maritime law.

Soveriegn citizens, freemen etc live by Common Law, this was laid down before Maritime Law came into being, most originating with Alfred pre 1000 AD, hence why he was called 'The Great'. However what i have found on my travels around the world of Freemen/soveriegn citizens is when you have fucked the establishment they try and pull a fast on and revert to 'Canon Law', now this is where it can get interesting as they are falling back to the bible.

[link to jforjustice.net] has a very interesting take on this, i haven't had call to try and use it yet but it is there

Provide the case you want (Rickman vs Ware maybe?) (US vs THOMAS?) and I will show you how you are dead wrong.

Proceed, endorser.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

Ya please show me where those court cases were wrong?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

First off, US Notes are NOT Federal Reserve Notes, Rickman V Ware, Rickman refused US notes and demanded gold or silver coin. The court simply ruled that US Notes are legal tender and lawful money of the United States (US notes, since you are ignorant to what they are, are issued and backed by Gold or silver coin of face value).

Federal Reserve Notes are NOT issued by the US Treasury and are NOT backed by anything but an endorsement of the end user.

Federal Reserve Notes are not the Subject matter of Rickman Vs Ware. End of discussion.

in Thomas, he never demanded his redemption of his FRNS for lawful money per 12 USC 411, therefore, by contract endorsement and consent, he made FRNS lawful money (since he used them as such) and did owe TAXES on them for his use.

Simple as that and I never said "the cases" are wrong, I simply posted YOU were wrong in your reading of them.

If FRNs are "lawful money" as issued, why does not legal notice on them read:

"THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE"

It should just read "THIS IS LAWFUL MONEY"

and this:

"Federal reserve notes, to be issued at the discretion of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for the purpose of making advances to Federal reserve banks through the Federal reserve agents as hereinafter set forth and for no other purpose, are authorized. The said notes shall be obligations of the United States and shall be receivable by all national and member banks and Federal reserve banks and for all taxes, customs, and other public dues. They shall be redeemed in lawful money on demand at the Treasury Department of the United States, in the city of Washington, District of Columbia, or at any Federal Reserve bank."

Would not be the Federal law telling us they can be redeemed for lawful money on demand.

Since none of u seem to know what the h-ll u are talking about ill chime in.First the Constitution is not a contract it is a trust arrangement written by “We the People” making the government trustees. (Read the Preamble)

“As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer. [1] Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts. [2] That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves. [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public. [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual. [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.[6]”63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247

Second most do not realize that is basic understanding in law that the people are self governing just like the US GOV. ( a federal corporation) is self governing28 USC § 3002 - DEFINITIONS(15)“United States” means—(A)a Federal corporation; [link to www.law.cornell.edu]

The people are self governing by the common law, grand juries, indictments, jury trials.

The gov. is self governed by rules, regulation, codes, statutes, and administrative courts (this is what most are referring to when they talk about maritime law.)

Statutes only apply to government

There are two worlds going on at the same time. The question then is what world were u in at the time of any compliant.

“The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.” DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)

If the constitution is the supreme law of the land and only applies to government, what makes u think that anything below that applies to anything but the government? There are no such things as constitutional rights, ur rights come from god so read your bible, the constitution merely recognizes what is already known to be true.

“The restrictions that the Constitution places upon the government in its capacity as lawmaker, i.e., as the regulator of private conduct, are not the same as the restrictions that it places upon the government in its capacity as employer. We have recognized this in many contexts, with respect to many different constitutional guarantees. Private citizens perhaps cannot be prevented from wearing long hair, but policemen can. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 247 (1976). Private citizens cannot have their property searched without probable cause, but in many circumstances government employees can. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 723 (1987) (plurality opinion); id., at 732 (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment). Private citizens cannot be punished for refusing to provide the government information that may incriminate them, but government employees can be dismissed when the incriminating information that they refuse to provide relates to the performance of their job. Gardner v. Broderick, [497 U.S. 62, 95] 392 U.S. 273, 277 -278 (1968). With regard to freedom of speech in particular: Private citizens cannot be punished for speech of merely private concern, but government employees can be fired for that reason. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). Private citizens cannot be punished for partisan political activity, but federal and state employees can be dismissed and otherwise punished for that reason. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101 (1947); Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 556 (1973); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 616 -617 (1973).”RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS, 497 U.S. 62 (1990)

Public trustees (government employees) are not protected by the constitution which is why constitution arguments cannot be made in administrative courts.

The TPTB learned a long time ago that forcing people into slavery didn’t work well, so they made the people free(sovereign) and used the masses stupidly against them to get them to contract themselves back into slavery.

I’ll finish with what sovereign actually means.-Blacks Law 2nd EditionSovereign- a chief ruler with supreme power, a king or other ruler with limited power

“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts”YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)

"at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called), and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty."Chisholm v. Georgia - 2 U.S. 419 (1793)

Resources for further study:-sedm.org-1215.org-teamlaw.org-Rob Menard-Dean Clifford (who is currently being held in jail as a political prisoner)

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

Nobody knows what they are talking about on this thread? Speak for yourself.

Dean Clifford is in jail and has been numerous times because he is still endorsing the private credit of international bankers. Same with Rob, teamlaw and 1215.

You endorse their debt system and do not play by their rules, you are sunk.

ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) the suitors who are redeeming lawful money are consistently winning against the IRS, local courts and more importantly, avoiding them all together.

If you are not demanding your redemption as spelled out in 12 USC 411 and try what others are doing, you will be in the same place as Dean Clifford, Ted Turner and all the rest of the "trust" "sovereign" gurus.

Your either a complete morAn or a government troll. My post here is the only one worth reading. The lawfull money arguement has been destroyed in court many times. Federal Reserve Notes are 100% lawfull and legal. U keep on going about the public debt. ALL DEBTS ARE OWED TO THE CREDITORS. WHO THEN IS THE CREDITOR? I'LL GIVE U A HINT IT'S THE PEOPLE

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 20179835

You are not "the people" if you endorse Federal Reserve Credit. I am not the one sitting in jail, Dean Clifford is, AGAIN.

And Federal Reserve notes are 100% legal and lawful IF and ONLY IF they are endorsed as such by one of the people.

The sad fact is, once you endorse them, you are not acting as one of the people any more.

Your guru is in jail, I am not and have not been for many years, I am sorry if you do not like those facts, but they are the facts.

Also, there are no cases against anyone who is demanding lawful money per 12 USC 411, so you are talking shit about it being destroyed in court cases.

Provide the case you want (Rickman vs Ware maybe?) (US vs THOMAS?) and I will show you how you are dead wrong.

Proceed, endorser.

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288

Look, this is all just as made up as all the other bullshit. Law this, law that, there is no law, with things like the NDAA, drones, hollow points, assassinations, there is no law. You are hiding yourself behind a paper tiger, something that is just as much an illusion as their system.

Tyranny is tyranny, you cannot contract with anyone who has never signed anything, or willingly entered said contract.

You can not scream, yell, and preach to a nation that has been brainwashed from birth, and expect them to sit down and study some legal tripe that is just as complicated and just as idiotic as the system they just woke up from. People are sick of being robbed, stolen, and enslaved.

You did say that God is who bestows your freedoms upon you, that is the short and simple truth, and if anyone tries to steal those freedoms, it is Tyranny, and therefore should be dealt with accordingly.

A lot of this seems to hinge on the claim the government is a corp. My understanding is that all governments are sovereign entities and immune from liability. Therefore, they would not need the protection that incorporation would afford. Many government agencies are corporations but only to protect them and make doing business easier.

Oh good lord OP why would you ask GLP - which is filled with lunatics - whether they support a realistic portrayal of sovereign citizen lunacy? Of course they don't thats why they post here.

This sovereign citizen stuff is essentially a legal mythology. It has no foundation in the real law. At best, you will make the judge think you are mentally ill. At worst, you'll get thrown in jail and heavily fined for things that you would have gotten away with if you hadn't been living in fantasy land.